Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WNYT (internet radio) (2nd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. John254 00:25, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WNYT (internet radio)

It doesn't appear that this campus radio station was ever licensed. Article lacks reliable 3rd party references and I'm having difficulty finding any due to the Albany based TV station with that government assigned callsign. Rtphokie (talk) 11:53, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This radio station was licensed, and since converted to an Internet only radio station, has kept its former call letters, WNYT. This was already marked for deletion, and that was closed. I am the current General Manager of WNYT, and I will find notable sources to support the history stated on the existing entry. This should absolutely not be deleted or merged. While it is a part of NYIT, it is operated as a somewhat independent entity, and has a unique history, making it notable. Try this Google [1]. --Jimbro727 (talk) 18:13, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep on the grounds that this article passed AFD with a snowball keep decision only 3 weeks ago. Articles should not be renominated in such a short period of time. 23skidoo (talk) 20:52, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment previous AFD was flawed, no debate took place as a result. Article still has problems and it's notability is still in question.--Rtphokie (talk) 21:31, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment You seem to be the only one questioning it.. Its notability is not in question among those interested in local radio stations in Long Island, NY. --Jimbro727 (talk) 00:38, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Comment. In addition, a statement indicating intent to improve the article has been made (yes, by someone involved in the topic, but there is no rule saying that is prohibited so long as WP:NPOV and WP:RS are maintained). 23skidoo (talk) 16:35, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete': Does not show notability per WP:NOTABILITY. Schuym1 (talk) 01:53, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep as a totally inappropriate nomination--looking at the previous afd, it was not closed on technical grounds, but because there was clear immediate agreement that it was shown to be an appropriate article. After a keep,. one should wait a few months. DGG (talk) 05:25, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep - Inappropriate nomination. Last nomination was closed only three weeks ago. — neuro^(talk) 09:18, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn Given the indication of previous licensing (and the fact that notability isn't temporary) this article appears to have some chance of improvement. Jimbro727 has been contacted and offered assistance in updating this article to prevent WP:COI issues.--Rtphokie (talk) 18:59, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.